Emily Blunt

The Girl on the Train

Before I see a film, there’s an occasional bit of trepidation. There’s always the risk that the results will not live up to the expectation, especially if the studio includes the best moments in the trailer. Good editing and well-placed scenes can leave you duped. Such was the case with The Girl on the Train, a film that teased mystery and suspense, but failed to deliver on both. I was expecting something in the vein of Gone Girl but was left with something much more forgettable.

Emily Blunt (Sicario) stars as Rachel, a troubled divorcee who hasn’t gotten over her ex-husband Tom (Justin Theroux, Zoolander 2), despite the fact that he’s moved on by starting a family with his former mistress. Rachel is battling demons, struggling with addiction, living day to day with the loneliness and betrayal of her failed marriage. She commutes to Manhattan on the train every day, often gazing out at the sprawling homes dotting the train’s path. One home in particular draws her attention, a charming white abode occupied by an enchanting young couple. The woman, a carefree blonde, is everything Rachel wishes she were: vibrant, hopeful, in love. Her husband appears devoted and loving. Rachel crafts a narrative for the couple in her mind, spinning fanciful tales from weeks of brief observations.

When the young woman Rachel’s been observing goes missing, she comes even more unhinged. Claiming to have witnessed her abduction, she tells the authorities – who are reluctant to believe her, given her fragile emotional state. Things get even more complicated when it’s revealed that the missing woman was also Tom’s nanny. The characters are intertwined in a way that isn’t abundantly clear – and here’s where I hoped the film could’ve been more suspenseful. For a substantial portion of the film we watch Rachel stumble through her pathetic life in a lonely haze, but instead of empathizing with the character, I was mostly apathetic.

Furthermore, the story felt disjointed, as writer Erin Cressida Wilson (Men, Women & Children) used flashbacks, frequently shifting back and forth from different perspectives and points in the recent past. Perhaps this device was employed in the book from which the film was adapted, and maybe it was more effective in that medium, but it faltered here. The pacing was slow and uneven, and I didn’t feel emotionally connected to the characters. The film didn’t become worthwhile until its final act, which was overwhelmingly predictable. I feel catfished by this movie. Take it from me and save your money. Grade: D+

Sicario

It’s been a relatively lackluster year at the movies, so when I started to hear buzz about Sicario, I figured it might be a sleeper. The trailer promised a taut political action drama featuring an accomplished cast, including Academy Award winner Benicio Del Toro (Inherent Vice), Emily Blunt (Edge of Tomorrow) and Josh Brolin (Inherent Vice). The film focuses on the US government’s efforts to thwart the Mexican drug cartels and their encroachment across the border. The opening sequence is a heart-stopping raid that results in tragic casualties for the FBI, and the Bureau is left reeling.

Blunt stars as Federal Agent Kate Macer, tough but rather naïve in her approach to neutralizing the cartel. She has bought into a self-righteous way of doing things, earnest but green. After she and partner Reggie Wayne (Daniel Kaluuya, Kick Ass 2) narrowly survive the aforementioned raid, she’s offered an opportunity to join a task force comprised of various intelligence agencies, military personnel and assorted covert types. Heading the task force is Matt Graver (Brolin), a CIA analyst liaising between the Agency and the Bureau. Alejandro Gillick (Del Toro) is attached to Graver, who introduces him to Kate as a DoD consultant. She’s immediately suspicious of him, and neither man provides much clarity about just what his function is on the team.

The task force must travel to Juarez, Mexico to extricate a witness, all the while flying under the cartel’s radar. Corpses line the streets of Juarez, swaying to and fro as a reminder of what happens if you dare cross them. Filmmaker Denis Villeneuve (Prisoners) held me at rapt attention, as the film was peppered with one jaw-clenching scene after another. Graver and Alejandro are at the forefront of every operation, mysteriously speaking in hushed tones while furthering Macer’s suspicions. Sicario is Spanish for hitman, and from the film’s outset it was clear that Alejandro is a questionable character with shaky allegiances. Macer and her partner are in over their heads, as everyone else seems to be privy to a secret that they know nothing about. The film follows Macer as she pieces together Alejandro’s identity and her questions her own principles.

Sicario is one of the better films of 2015. Usually movies like this have a lull at the midway point, after becoming mired in plot minutiae. However, I was genuinely enthralled throughout. The pacing was superb, and while director Denis Villeneuve hasn’t surpassed the suspense of Prisoners, he has crafted a very good film. Benecio Del Toro was quietly menacing, conveying a great deal while saying very little. Blunt continues to impress me with the emotional quality she brings to her performances, as well as the impressive physicality and bravado characterized by roles like this as well as in other films like Edge of Tomorrow. This is definitely one to check out. Grade: A

Looper

Every self-proclaimed movie buff has a favorite genre and type of movie.  My favorites are suspense thrillers or crime dramas.  I also like movies that feature intersecting storylines.  I think the best movies are “high concept,” meaning that the storyline is uniquely original and it features a refreshing central idea.  Some examples would be Inception, In Time, and Minority Report.  All three of those movies were unlike anything that preceded them.  Looper was such a movie, a high concept tale characterized by an inventive storyline.

J. Gordon Levitt (Inception) has matured into a fine young actor.  He has been impressive in everything I’ve ever seen in him, most notably 500 Days of Summer.  In Looper he stars as Joe, a young criminal in the desolate future of 2044.  30 years from that in 2074, time travel will be possible.  It is ultimately outlawed, used only by criminal organizations in secret as a way of eliminating unwanted offenders.  Joe is a looper, a person who executes people who have been sent back from the future.  Criminals in 2074 send their victim (always another criminal) back in time to 2044, where they are immediately shotgun blasted out of existence by a looper.  There is now virtually no trace of the person ever having existed.  It’s a sad and efficient way of dispensing with an enemy.  Occasionally a crime boss will want to get rid of an employee, even a looper.  When this happens, the looper will make the requisite kill, only to remove the pillowcase from his victim to discover that it’s him or herself (in the future).  This is called “closing your loop,” which means that your future self no longer exists.  The worst thing that a looper could do is fail to close his loop by letting his future self escape.  An open loop means that a future and present version of the looper co-exist in the present.  It also means that they haven’t been removed from the future yet.  It would be like 33-year-old Tanya and 63-year-old Tanya chilling right now in 2012.  Bugged out, right?  Exactly, that’s why it can’t happen.  As crazy as it must seem to put a bullet in your future self, that’s what a looper must do, if necessary.  Joe doesn’t lack the resolve to do it, but he bungles a hit on his future self (Bruce Willis, Red) when the time comes.

Of course, being a looper, Future Joe (Willis) knows exactly what is going to happen when his bosses try to send him back in time.  He prepares for it and outsmarts Present Joe easily, overpowering him and escaping.  I’m just going to refer to Future Joe as Bruce Willis, for simplicity’s sake.  Once his bosses find out that Joe didn’t close his loop, they send a bounty hunter (Jeff Daniels, The Newsroom) back in time to eliminate both Joes – the young one for botching the job and the old one because he was the target in the first place.  Joe himself is also very committed to killing himself, stopping at nothing to track Bruce Willis down.  There is a curious dynamic between Young Joe and Bruce Willis, as their agendas are wildly divergent.  Bruce Willis wants to make sure that his life plays out, as it should, the way he knows it.  He already knows what his version of the future holds, because he’s lived it.  He has a wife that he’ll never meet if Young Joe somehow alters the course of their lives.  Young Joe wants to make his own way in the world and cares nothing for a hypothetical future that he knows nothing about.

Looper was an intriguing movie.  Its high concept premise lured me in, but there were several enjoyable elements.  The casting was great.  Bruce Willis was fitting as the grisly older man who is one step ahead of his younger self.  He really looks like an older version of J. Gordon Levitt, which was especially noticeable in one scene where both actors were shown in profile.  Emily Blunt was also featured, and I think she’s very versatile.  Here she showed a vulnerability and sense of love and compassion that I liked very much.  Her performance was both emotional and convincing.  Levitt always simply does whatever is required of him, and he does it very well.   Looper was nearly flawless, and I hope that Levitt continues to challenge himself with great scripts like this one.  Grade:  A